FW: The Old Argument: Framemaker vs. MS Word

Subject: FW: The Old Argument: Framemaker vs. MS Word
From: Darren Barefoot <dbarefoot -at- mpsbc -dot- com>
To: "'techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com'" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000 14:00:57 -0800

Good afternoon,

I've caught some flack for my (admittedly inaccurate) statement below. What
I meant to convey, which clearly I did not, was that I wouldn't rely upon
FrameMaker over the long term. I mean, the release notes in our version,
Frame 5.5.3, indicate that it shipped in 1998. With the exception of the
recent Linux-friendly version, I haven't seen much that indicates that Adobe
is particularly interested in the product. Besides, how Web-friendly can a
product be that has a spell-checker that does not include the term
"Internet"?

Maybe I'm off-base here, but I liked Beta video when it came out, and
originally used a Netscape browser, and got burned on both. I don't plan to
make the mistake three times. DB.

<snip>
The reality is, if you want to generate a number of digital output formats
(HTML, HTMLHelp, WinHelp, PDF, etc.), FrameMaker is not a viable
alternative.







Previous by Author: RE: The Old Argument: Framemaker vs. MS Word
Next by Author: RE: Importing Access records into Word
Previous by Thread: RE: The Old Argument: Framemaker vs. MS Word
Next by Thread: Re: The Old Argument: FrameMaker vs. MS Word


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads